Wp(C)/5083/2018 Of Kerala Live Stock Development Board Ltd v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 / 2ND PHALGUNA, 1939 WP(C).No. 5083 of 2018 PETITIONER(S) KERALA LIVE STOCK DEVELOPMENT BOARD LTD. GOKULAM,PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 004, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. BY ADVS.SMT.SUMATHY DANDAPANI (SR.) SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI RESPONDENT(S): 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE(1), KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003. 2. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS), KOWDIAR THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003. R BY SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-02-2018,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30.12.2016.EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 30.12.2016 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR A SUM OF RS.13,22,20,080/-.EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DTD. 25.01.2017.EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 07.02.2017.EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER BEARING NO.CIR-1(1) TVM/STAY/16-17 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 20.02.2017.EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FOR STAY FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 2.3.2017.EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER BEARING NO.CIR-1(1)TVM/STAY/16-17 DATED 17.03.2017.EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.C.NO. 701/J/CIT/STAY/86/2016-17 DATED 23.01.2018 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER BEARING NO.AAACK9533D/CIR-I/TVM/17-18 DATED 7.2.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER IN ITA NOS. 474, 484 AND 485/COCH/2016 DATED 1.2.2018. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// SD/- P.A. TO JUDGE P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J. ================ W.P.(C).No.5083 of 2018 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21[st] day of February, 2018 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is an assessee under the Income Tax Act(the Act) on the rolls of the first respondent. The selfassessment made by the petitioner under the Act for the year2014-’15 has been revised by the first respondent in terms ofExt.P1 order under Section 143(3) of the Act. Aggrieved byExt.P1 order, the petitioner preferred Ext.P3 appeal before thethird respondent and the same is pending. Ext.P11 is the staypetition preferred by the petitioner in Ext.P3 appeal. Earlier,the petitioner had moved the assessing authority under sub-section (6) of Section 220 of the Act for stay of realisation ofthe amounts covered by Ext.P1 order. In terms of Ext.P5 order,the assessing authority granted the stay sought for by thepetitioner on condition that they shall remit 15% of the : 2 : Petitioner is an assessee under the Income Tax Act(the Act) on the rolls of the first respondent. The selfassessment made by the petitioner under the Act for the year2014-’15 has been revised by the first respondent in terms ofExt.P1 order under Section 143(3) of the Act. Aggrieved byExt.P1 order, the petitioner preferred Ext.P3 appeal before thethird respondent and the same is pending. Ext.P11 is the staypetition preferred by the petitioner in Ext.P3 appeal. Earlier,the petitioner had moved the assessing authority under sub-section (6) of Section 220 of the Act for stay of realisation ofthe amounts covered by Ext.P1 order. In terms of Ext.P5 order,the assessing authority granted the stay sought for by thepetitioner on condition that they shall remit 15% of the : 2 : demand. The petitioner though moved the second respondentfor a review of Ext.P5 order, the second respondent, as perExt.P8, modified Ext.P5 order directing the petitioner to pay 20%of the demand. The petitioner is aggrieved by Exts.P5 and P8orders. The case of the petitioner is that in the light of Ext.P10order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in respect ofthe assessments of the petitioner for the previous years, thepetitioner ought to have been granted absolute stay by theauthorities. The petitioner, therefore, seeks appropriatedirections in this regard. 2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner asalso the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of thecase, especially Ext.P10 order passed by the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writpetition directing the third respondent to pass orders on Ext.P11application for stay. Ordered accordingly. This shall be done withintwo months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.Needless to say that in the matter of complying with the directionaforesaid, Ext.P10 order passed by the Income Tax Appellate W.P.(C).No.5083 of 2018 Tribunal in the case of the petitioner for the previous years shallbe taken into account. Needless also to say that furtherproceedings pursuant to Ext.P1 order shall be deferred till ordersare passed by the appellate authority as directed above. sd/- SKS P.B.SURESH KUMAR JUDGE